If the dollar has little value, then donate a few.

Monday, February 14, 2011

Fairness at the light

The Comm appeal argues for fairness at the light.

Fairness and consistency. Reasonable limitations.

Some ideas such as the length of yellow being set, cameras not for use as revenue source and consistency of penalty between municipalities and police officers are a few of the ideas floating around. Some people like the idea of requiring actual Tennessee post certified officers being the ones deciding on who gets the tickets as well.


  1. The one thing missing from this is letting the public decide themeselves.

    LET THE PUBLIC VOTE! Something the scaemra side DOESN'T want! See latest example: http://tdn.com/news/state-and-regional/washington/article_53b3b8ae-3692-11e0-8653-001cc4c03286.html?mode=story Town trying to use courts to STOP petition drive to let VOTERS DECIDE IN WA STATE TOWN!

    Fight the SCAM!

    Ban the CAMS!


    also see TN site: http://www.facebook.com/killtncams

    (READ more on FLAWED (Almost FRAUDLANT) IIHS RLC REPORT: http://blog.motorists.org/iihs-flawed-ticket-camera-press-release

    and: http://camerafraud.wordpress.com/2011/02/01/chandler-refuses-to-stand-behind-bogus-study

  2. The length of the amber (yellow) is based on the intersection geometry and the design speed of the affected road. The amber can include an all red segment (where all lights are red for every road) if the length of the amber is too long for safety. The design/timing of lights should be left to professionals and not dictated by the legislature.

    Require the timing of lights to be set/approved by a Registered Professional Engineer. This would take short timing and other political decisions to generate revenue out of the picture.

    Require that tickets can only be issued when the next traffic direction in sequence (opposing traffic or cross traffic, more than two roads can meet at an intersection) turns green. Many municipalities have decided that the amber is part of the red and ticket accordingly, this needs to be stopped.

    Strongly suggest you consult with a traffic engineer on this subject.

  3. Even if the timing is correct/improved or if stopping by the next green is allowed, this still does not address the due process violations that are used when municipalities use the revenue cameras. Taking a photograph of a license plate does not prove whom is making the moving violation in the vehicle. Assuming guilt of the registered owner until they prove themselves innocent is wrong. Changing the misdemeanor moving violation into a civil offense/parking ticket with a $50 fine so municipalities can "get away with this" is wrong. Having traffic vigilantes generate citations that they share in the revenues for is wrong.

    As a licensed professional engineer, I'd be all for mandating some work at the taxpayer's expense...but it isn't necessary. Making wrong "better" isn't a real improvement.

  4. Eric, as another PE I was addressing the well intentioned idiot who suggested fixing the amber time and the practice of shorting the amber so the motorist is crossing in the red. Fixing the amber time would be like legislating Phi as 3.2 just to make it easy. Requiring a PE to sign off on timing would allow an already existing regulatory process to be used to enforce violations.

    Ever received a speeding ticket? You are guilty. Period. It is the same thing and I agree it is wrong. But traffic cameras are a fact of life and the political will is not there yet to ban them. Regulating their use to prevent abuse is a best option.

  5. Well you guys need to quit talking about it and actually do something. I know that you personally have the right convictions, but a bunch of the Republicans in the house are just worthless on this issue.


Here are the rules for comments. Know them. Live them.